A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-May/035272.html below:

[Pydotorg] updated notes about building bsddb185 module

[Python-Dev] Re: [Pydotorg] updated notes about building bsddb185 module [Python-Dev] Re: [Pydotorg] updated notes about building bsddb185 moduleSkip Montanaro skip@pobox.com
Fri, 2 May 2003 19:11:53 -0500
    Skip> I suppose that's an alternative, however, it is complicated by a
    Skip> couple issues:
    Skip> 
    Skip> * The bsddb185 module would have to be built as bsddb (not a big
    Skip>   deal in and of itself).

    Martin> Why is that? I propose to build the bsddb185 module as
    Martin> bsddb185. It does not support being built as bsddb[module].

    Skip> * The current bsddb package directory would have to be renamed or
    Skip>   not installed to avoid name clashes.

    Martin> I suggest no such thing, and I agree that this would not be
    Martin> desirable.

My apologies, Martin.  I guess I misunderstood what you suggested.  (I
suspect Nick Vargish may have as well.)  My interpretation of his complaint
is that he doesn't have a functioning bsddb module and wants the old module
back.  He wants to be able to install Python and have "bsddb" be the module.
As currently constituted, I think Modules/bsddbmodule.c can only be built as
"bsddb185" because of the symbols in the file.  How can Nick build that as
"bsddb"?  Furthermore, how can you guarantee that the bsddb package
directory won't be found before the bsddb module during a module search
(short, perhaps of statically linking the module into the interpreter)?

Skip




RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4